I was told by a contractor that they were going to rebuild. If I understood him correctly, they weren't going to tear down the large part of the structure that wasn't affected by the fire.
Of course, this was on the street a few days after the fire so things could have changed.
The report is great! Villas are the symbols of luxury and class as everyone knows. Prices depends on the maintenance and the area all around. I am impressed with Luxury Arizona Real Estate market for providing best villas.
^ I doubt it, something similar happen to a large Mission Bay apartment construction project in San Fran several months ago (welder touched off a fire that quickly out of control) and was promptly forgotten about in a week or so.
I remember seeing this 3949 fire in person a few years ago. I lived on Lindell at the time, except a few blocks down. I could still see it, though. It was terrifying. I don't think I'd ever feel safe living in wood frame building.
I know brick is expensive, but I saw a lot of construction in Chicago going up that was cinder block on the sides and back with a simple brick façade in front. It made for what looked like a much more beautiful, sturdy building, and I can imagine the cinder block on the sides and back saving a ton of money. Why is this not a thing here?
jsbru wrote:I know brick is expensive, but I saw a lot of construction in Chicago going up that was cinder block on the sides and back with a simple brick façade in front. It made for what looked like a much more beautiful, sturdy building, and I can imagine the cinder block on the sides and back saving a ton of money. Why is this not a thing here?
I know nothing on the subject, but I feel like wood-frame is better from a seismic perspective. I could be 150% off-base, but my gut says that a cinder block frame would just crumble, whereas wood-frame would be a bit more flexible. Someone immediately correct me, if/when I'm wrong.
^You're right, though with proper reinforcements you can do a lot to the ability of masonry to stand up to seismic loads. Like everything, it's all about the design of the structure. Realistically, any full masonry building is also going to be framed out for running systems and insulation, so there will still be a wood framed structure.
Using concrete block (CMU) is cheaper than brick for the facade, but it's also not the most sightly facade. I would actually rather see a good composite siding instead of CMU, and I'm not a fan of mullet houses at all. I have been involved in one way or another with the renovation of a lot of masonry buildings both small and large, including my own, and I can assure you that masonry is not cheap. I spent $70k on my own house rebuilding walls, and it would have been even more if my mason wasn't a nice guy and cut me a deal. I guarantee I could have slapped cheap vinyl siding on there for much cheaper, but it would look horrible on a historic rehab. It all comes down to what costs the market can cover, and what the developer is willing to do to build a good product. Construction is expensive. Lightweight wood construction is cheap in comparison to steel and concrete for multi-story buildings, and can be built to handle the loads. Developers are going to do it whether we like it or not. The finished product with properly built and placed firewalls shouldn't be any more vulnerable to fire than any other building (especially if it has a fire suppression system), but a substantial wood structure during the construction period is an inferno waiting to happen.
^ I like it. While we're off the topic, one of the disappointments for the year is that none of the various proposals for a container structure moved forward (apparently). Deem's Empire Café on Cherokee was sidelined and the proposal for the Grove gave way to parking for the mixed-use redevelopment across the street. Not that I'd particularly want a sea of container structures taking over our built environment, but it would be nice to have a few examples here and there.
Back on topic, has anything gone in to replace the J Gumbo's yet?
MattnSTL wrote:Using concrete block (CMU) is cheaper than brick for the facade, but it's also not the most sightly facade. I would actually rather see a good composite siding instead of CMU, and I'm not a fan of mullet houses at all.
I really like this term- mullet housing.
I'd like to see a developer build some short shotgun, mullet houses and market them that way, just to see if they'd take off.
